similar to: Default ACL inheritance question

Look at the acl(5) man page and you'll see that the ACCESS CHECK ALGORITH starts: IF the effective user ID of the process matches the user ID of the file object owner ... ELSE IF the effective user ID of the process matches the qualifier of any entry of type ACL_USER, THEN IF the matching ACL_USER entry and the ACL_MASK entry contain the requested permissions, access is

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 #$ setfacl -m u:mf:r bla #$ getfacl bla # file: bla # owner: root # group: root user::rw- user:mf:r-- group::r-- mask::r-- other::r-- It is readable by mf like intended. #$ chmod go-rwx bla #$ getfacl bla # file: bla # owner: root # group: root user::rw- user:mf:r-- #effective:--- group::r-- #effective:--- mask::--- other::--- It is not

> > On the file serever: > > Collected config --- 2019-07-03-10:27 ----------- > > > > Hostname: srv > > DNS Domain: a.b.hu > > FQDN: srv.a.b.hu > > ipaddress: 10.0.3.15 192.168.0.8 > > ----------- > > Samba is running as a Unix domain member > > ----------- > > > > This computer is running Debian 10.0 x86_64 > >

Hello, Sometimes I have to create and use Navision Databases on samba shares - this works with samba 2.0.x but does not with samba 2.2.x (tried 2.2.3a and 2.2.4). The following tests were done with a acl enabeled samba and an acl aware kernel/filesystem, but I also have done these tests with acl not compiled into samba on an host without acl in the kernel - same result, does not work, same

Hi guys, I've got a problem where if I set permissions on a folder(Admin) "setfacl -R -d -m u::rwx,g::wrx,o::- Admin/" and "setfacl -m o:- Admin" I get the following. mail:/data/samba/shared # getfacl Admin/ # file: Admin # owner: BCP+administrator # group: samba user::rwx user:samba:rwx group::rwx group:BCP+admin:r-x mask::rwx other::--- default:user::rwx

Dear All I am facing a strange problem that I could not solve, so, maybe you can help me. Look at this situation: I created a new directory with those ACLs (through Samba using Windows XP) [root@server /home/smb/adm]# getfacl teste #file:teste #owner:1002 #group:1006 user::rwx group::rwx group:suporte:rwx group:administ:rwx mask::rwx other::--- [root@server /home/smb/adm]# getfacl -d teste

Maybe I'm doing somthing really stupid, but while copying some windows share onto a samba server, on some random subdirectory robocopy says ERROR 87 (0x00000057) Copying NTFS Security to Destination Directory... The samba logfile has lots of these lines. modules/vfs_posixacl.c:349(smb_acl_to_posix) smb_acl_to_posix: ACL is invalid for set (Das Argument ist ung?ltig) The strange thing is

On Fri, 30 Nov 2018 09:06:34 +0000 Rowland Penny via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > On Fri, 30 Nov 2018 06:16:42 +0000 (UTC) > barani tharan <aru_barani at yahoo.com> wrote: > > > Dear Rowland Penny > >  I follow your mentioned step still i am face the same problem > > I have 1 Domain Controller [sambadc] and 1 Domain member for Samba > >

On 2019-02-19 3:47 pm, Rowland Penny via samba wrote: > On Tue, 19 Feb 2019 15:25:51 -0500 >> What exactly does "START AGAIN" imply? Just chmod? > > 'ls' shows the correct ownership and Unix permissions: > > drwxrwx---+ 4 root domain admins 4096 Feb 17 19:13 programs > > But 'getfacl' show something different: > > getfacl:

Hi Rowland, Thank you for the reply and info. On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 11:19 AM, Rowland Penny <rpenny at samba.org> wrote: > On Tue, 13 Jun 2017 09:15:40 +0200 > Neil via samba <samba at lists.samba.org> wrote: > > > OK, this a DC and therefore you will have to do things differently from > a Unix domain member. > > You might as well remove these lines from

On btrfs, do the following ------------------ # su user1 # cd btrfs-part/ # touch aaa # getfacl aaa # file: aaa # owner: user1 # group: user1 user::rw- group::rw- other::r-- # su user2 # cd btrfs-part/ # setfacl -m u::rwx aaa # getfacl aaa # file: aaa # owner: user1 # group: user1 user::rwx <- successed to setfacl group::rw- other::r-- ------------------ but we

Hi guys, I'm having trouble setting up my file server running Samba 4 (4.0.3). I had no problem joining the domain (also a Samba 4 (4.0.3) with AD) but I can't get the ACL to work properly. I'm sure my settings are wrong and hoping for some help. When I try to set a user permission I get this error: setfacl -m u:administrator:rwx test3.txt setfacl: test3.txt: Malformed access ACL

Wonder if someone can point me in the right direction here - just built some new bricks running gluster 3.4 alpha 3 (from http://download.gluster.org) with the objective of testing them to replace some existing 3.2 systems in production. The main thing I was after was NFS ACL support, however on getting everything setup, I still don't seem to be able to see POSIX extended ACLs on the

Hi I posted this last week but go no answers. So I try again in case someone has any idea... I have a file server (linux with acl and quotas custom 2.4.18 kernel, samba 2.2.7a with acl, quotas and winbind) among others there's a share on which any user of the domain is allowed to put files, any user able to read and write other users' files (a public and free space) the problem is that

Solaris 10U3, latest kqemu, qemu-0.9.0-CVS plus TAP patch. I''m aware that a fair amount of "rootish" access is required for the TAP and bridge stuff, and I''m working on that. As kind of a secuirty thought, I figured I''d use setfacl to give myself access to the /dev/kqemu device instead of leaving it mode 664 or 666. However, that didn''t work.

On 24/02/15 20:35, Rowland Penny wrote: > On 24/02/15 20:23, John wrote: >> I apologise for asking a basic question but I haven't been able to >> determine a sensible answer. >> >> I am using 4.1.17 as AD-DC. All configured and working with user home >> directories via [homes] and some other specific shares. >> >> Windows 7 client jointed to domain,

I hav a problem porting my ACLS from my old filserver to a new one... My old Fileserver: I have my shares on a partition supporting acls with ext3 /dev/md0 on /data/raid type ext3 (rw,acl,user_xattr) My new Fileserver: /dev/md0 on /data/raid type ext4 (rw,acl,user_xattr) Now I copied all my shares to the new Fileserver with rsync and backed up my acls with: getfacl -R

Hi all, I have "FreeBSD 7.0-CURRENT #1: Wed Jul 25" authenticating successfully against active directory via samba's winbindd(8). I need to manage samba shares via FreeBSD ACLs and CIFS ACLs. From my reading of setfacl(1) I should be able to set group permissions using the syntax of DOMAIN\group-name. For example: #setfacl -d -m g:"MYDOMAIN\mygroupname":rwx test

On 25/10/2020 20:37, Sonic wrote: > The reset allowed the current GPO to take effect, but right after > adding a new GPO (just named it, no editing, or linking) the > sysvolcheck fails: > # samba-tool ntacl sysvolcheck > ERROR(<class 'samba.provision.ProvisioningError'>): uncaught exception > - ProvisioningError: DB ACL on GPO directory >

I just tried that and I got the same error. I think there is some extended acl support that I'm missing somewhere. It's like the setfacl command is not recognizing the AD groups as valid groups. I should also add the following information: This server is built up on CentOS 6.6 Minimal using the Sernet-Samba Enterprise packages. It looks like the binary that is running is